With respect to the National Highway System (NHS), for core routes, feeder routes and remote northern routes: (a) what is the process for suggesting the addition of a new route to the Council of Ministers of Transportation and Highway Safety; and (b) how many provinces and territories must support the addition of a new route for it to be included in the NHS?

Mr. Speaker, in response to (a), any new route additions or other major changes to the NHS, including deletion from or movement within the three categories comprising core, feeder, and northern and remote routes, could be proposed by any jurisdiction including the federal government. In order to evaluate these proposals, jurisdictions are required to provide supporting information and the data as per established criteria and thresholds. The NHS task force then provides its recommendation to the council of ministers.

In addition, in 2007 ministers also agreed that a full review of the NHS be undertaken every five years to maintain its relevance due to changing economic, social and demographic conditions. Starting in 2009, the NHS review task force engaged in a thorough review of the NHS for 2010. However, the 2010 review has yet to be brought to closure as additional work is required prior to recommendations being tabled with the council of ministers.

In response to (b), all changes to the NHS must be unanimously approved by all members of the council of ministers responsible for transportation and highway safety.

With regard to the operating budget freeze at the Department of Finance: (a) what measures were taken to limit spending in the last fiscal year; (b) how many full-time and part-time employees were lost to attrition; (c) how many full-time or part-time employees were laid-off; (d) how many full-time and part-time employees were hired; and (e) what is the projected attrition rate over the next five years?

Shelly GloverConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, in response to (a), to ensure maximum efficiency for taxpayers’ dollars in the fiscal year 2010-11, as part of the government’s commitment outlined on page 161 of budget 2010, found at www.budget.gc.ca/2010/pdf/budget-planbudgetaire-eng.pdf, salary costs were reduced due to the time it takes to re-staff positions after staff departure, and measures were also put in place to reduce goods and services costs in areas such as travel. For 2011-12 and 2012-13, the department will continue these measures and seek additional opportunities for efficiencies in departmental operations.

In response to (b), attrition is defined as the number of employee departures. For the period April 1, 2010, to March 31, 2011, 255 employees left the department, 215 full-time employees and 40 part-time employees. These employees include indeterminates, terms, seconded in, part-time workers, casuals and students. The required salary savings resulted from the period the positions were vacant before being restaffed.

In response to (c), between April 1, 2010, and March 31, 2011, the Department of Finance did not lay off any full-time or part-time employees.

In response to (d), the department hired 225 employees between April 1, 2010, and March 31, 2011, including 185 full-time employees and 40 part-time employees. These employees include indeterminates, terms, seconded in, part-time workers, casuals and students. The 2011-12 main estimates reflected a reduction in the operating budget of the department due to a number of initiatives other than the budget 2010 commitments. The departure and hiring numbers were impacted by all of these items.

In response to (e), the percentage of indeterminate employees who have left the department in the last 5 years was 17.5%. These data are updated quarterly andare used for internal business planning.

With regard to the operating budget freeze at Environment Canada: (a) what measures were taken to limit spending in the last fiscal year; (b) how many full-time and part-time employees were lost to attrition; (c) how many full-time or part-time employees were laid-off; (d) how many full-time and part-time employees were hired; and (e) what is the projected attrition rate over the next five years?

Mr. Speaker, with regard to the operating budget freeze at Environment Canada, in response to (a), the key driver of the cost containment measures is the operating budget freeze that was articulated in the 2010 federal budget tabled in the House of Commons on March 4, 2010.

Two significant actions were announced in the budget to reduce growth in operating expenditures: operating budgets will be capped at the 2010-11 levels for the two fiscal years, 2011-12 and 2012-13; any wage and salary increases set in the Expenditure Restraint Act and in collective agreements applying from the beginning of 2010-11 and until the end of 2012 13 are to be absorbed by organizations.

These measures apply to all federal organizations appropriated by Parliament including departments, agencies and crown corporations.

The following items are excluded from the freeze: economic action plan spending which ends in March 2011; budget 2010 measures not included in the main estimates 2010-11; new policy initiatives approved by cabinet; non-discretionary labour costs, such as parental benefits or severance pay.

There was no government-wide freeze on hiring.

Within this context, Environment Canada has taken the following measures to limit spending for the 2010-2011 fiscal year.

Impact of budget 2010 measures for 2010-11 fiscal year have been included in 2010-11 supplementary estimates (A or B). There are no budget 2010 measures in supplementary estimates (C); budget 2010 measures for 2011-12 have been included in the 2011-12 main estimates. Travel, conferences and hospitality are within 2008-09 levels as directed by budget 2009 and are monitored by monthly reports. Efficiencies in the procurement process have been implemented. Human resources allocation has been re-evaluated and optimized.

In response to (b), the transactional data available in Environment Canada’s human resources management system,HRMS, does not provide information on whether any employees separated from the department as a result of the operating budget freeze. In the course of normal operations, however, during fiscal year 2010-11, 582 full-time employees and 1127 part-time employees left Environment Canada.

In response to (c), from April 1, 2010, to March 31, 2011, one full-time employee was laid off at Environment Canada. No part-time employees were laid off. The one layoff was a result of a lack of work due to the sudden ending of a research project, but it was not as a result of the operating budget freeze.

In response to (d), from April 1, 2011, to March 31, 2011, Environment Canada hired 432 full-time employees and 1,031 part-time employees in the course of normal operations.

In response to (e), in the next five years, it is estimated that Environment Canada will lose between 550 and 600 full-time employees each year to attrition for various separation reasons in the course of normal operations. No projections are available for the attrition of part-time employees due to the transitory nature of the types of work involved.

With regard to the Montreal Port Authority: (a) was the Prime Minister's Spokesperson, Dimitri Soudas, involved in any way in the appointment of the Montreal Port Authority's Chief Executive Officer; and (b) if the answer to (a) is in the affirmative, (i) what are the details of this involvement, (ii) did the Prime Minister consent to this involvement?

With regard to corporate taxation: (a) how many corporations in Canada paid no tax in each of the last ten years; and (b) for each corporation identified in (a), what were its revenues and its profits in each of the last ten years?

With regard to the expenditures of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development as identified in the 2011-12 Main Estimates: (a) what programs are funded under the lines (i) Northern Land, Resources and Environmental Management (page 191), (ii) Contribution for promoting the safe use, development, conservation and protection of the North’s natural resources (page 194), (iii) Contributions for promoting the political, social and scientific development of Canada’s three territories (page 195), (iv) Contributions for promoting regional development in Canada’s three territories (page 197), (v) Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency, Community Development (page 196); and (b) for each program identified in (a), what are the names or identities of each individual recipient of funds from each program and what amount of funding was provided to each recipient?

With regard to the PROminent FUNCtionaries of the Communist Party (PROFUNC), run by the government between 1950-1983: (a) when requested by an individual who believes his or her name may be on the PROFUNC list, will the government disclose whether or not that individual's name is on the list; (b) what was done with the names on the PROFUNC list once PROFUNC was discontinued; (c) were any of the names or was any of the information about individuals named on the PROFUNC list ever turned over to the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), or any other security agency, at any time after 1983; (d) were any of the names or was any of the information about individuals named on the list ever shared with the Government of the United States or any of its security, policing or military bodies; (e) did any of the RCMP personnel who helped compile or maintain PROFUNC work for CSIS or other security agencies following the end of the program; and (f) what other materials were created by individuals working for PROFUNC between 1950-1983 (i.e., minutes of meetings, reports filed by security agents, other documents)?

What is the total amount of government funding since fiscal year 2009-2010, up to and including the current fiscal year, allocated within the constituency of Vancouver East, identifying each department or agency, initiative and amount?

With respect to the Veterans Burial Regulations and the Corporation named by the Department of Veterans Affairs Act to administer the Veterans Funeral and Burial program, specifically the Last Post Fund (LPF): (a) what is the annual amount of financial support and funding provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs from 2006 to 2011 inclusively; (b) what is the statistical information, provided to the minister, on reimbursements provided by the LPF to assist in payment of funeral and burial costs for the estates of (i) First World War veterans, (ii) Second World War veterans, (iii) Korean War veterans, (iv) estates of veterans who received a disability benefit from Veterans Affairs Canada, (iv) estates of allied veterans; (c) what are the details of the annual administrative and operating costs of the LPF from 2006 to 2011 inclusively; (d) what are the details of the annual program costs of the Veterans Funeral and Burial Program from 2006 to 2011 inclusively; (e) what are the details of the annual salary costs for LPF staff from 2006 to 2011 inclusively; (f) what are the details of how frequently business plans, operating budgets, capital budgets and performance reports are submitted by the Corporation to the Minister; (g) what are the details of any departmental analysis concerning the raising of the means test for eligibility for support through the Veterans Funeral and Burial program; (h) what are the details of any departmental analysis concerning the extension of eligibility for a funeral and burial to all estate-tested Canadian Forces (CF) and RCMP veterans; (i) what is the estimated financial cost of extending eligibility to the Veterans Funeral and Burial program to all estate-tested CF and RCMP; (j) how often does the department conduct an assurance audit of the LPF; (k) when was the last time the government conducted an assurance audit of the LPF; and (l) when does the department plan to conduct the next assurance audit of the LPF?

With respect to Canadian Forces veterans trying to obtain an end to the deduction of Pension Act disability payments from Service Income Security Insurance Plan (SISIP) Long Term Disability benefits: (a) what is the total amount of money spent by all departments and agencies, excluding the Department of Justice, from March 2007 to 2011 inclusively, on the defence against the SISIP class action lawsuit; (b) what is the total amount of money the government has spent to hire outside legal counsel, from March 2007 to 2011 inclusively, on the SISIP class action lawsuit; and (c) what is the total amount of money spent by all government departments and agencies on the SISIP class action lawsuit, from March 2007 to 2011 inclusively, including all costs associated with the work of the Department of Justice?

With regard to veterans’ long-term care facilities and veterans’ contract beds in community care facilities: (a) what are all facilities, by province and territory, that are under contract by the Department of Veterans Affairs to provide veterans' beds; (b) for each facility identified in (a), what is (i) the number of beds, (ii) the average cost of a veteran’s bed; (c) when, by facility and province or territory, does the department expect to close veterans' beds based on the declining population of its Second World War and Korean War veteran clientele; (d) what are the details of any departmental analysis concerning the expansion of the definition of eligible veterans for admittance to veterans' health care centres; (e) what are the details of any departmental analysis concerning the government’s payment for veterans' beds at long-term care facilities or community care facilities for the spouses of Second World War and Korean War veterans; (f) does the department have any estimates of the cost of paying for veterans' beds at veterans’ long-term care or community care facilities for the spouses of Second World War and Korean War veterans and, if so, what are they; (g) what, if any, are the plans for the long-term care of modern-day Canadian Forces (CF) veterans who require long-term care and do not meet the criteria for admittance to veterans’ beds at veterans’ long-term care or community care facilities; and (h) is the department engaged in any discussion of the development of specialized medical centres for modern-day CF and RCMP veterans?